“It works 98 percent of the time. But it's the 2 percent of the time it doesn't that kills you.” Words from a corporate technician describing Windows? No, it's a comment voiced at LinuxWorld, the annual gathering of Linux adherents and prognosticators. The voice was none other than Jeremy White, president and leading Linux software developer at Minnesota-based Codeweavers. The audience was a group of Linux network administrators … and they nodded when he said it.

As the recent purchaser of Ximian and SuSE Linux, Novell feels competent to speak out on desktop Linux, and it's done so through Jack Messman, CEO of Novell. “Linux desktop need a little more work to be consistent,” says Messman. “I don't know how much of that will come about this year.”

The complaints voiced about the current Linux effort to unseat Windows are not uncommon. “It's a big pile of lumber with no agreed-upon standards,” said White, focusing on the extreme diversity and variety of Linux as an impediment to software standardization. The larger Linux software vendors have often complained that a lack of standardization among distributions or even desktop interfaces has inhibited Linux's ability to penetrate the corporation.

All was not gloom and despair, however. Independent research by IDC indicates Linux desktop shipments rose to 2.8% of all desktop operating systems for 2002, an increase of 1.1% over the prior year. That still relegates Linux to third place, however, behind the approximately 3% share of Apple Computer. Microsoft maintains dominance with a greater that 90% share of the desktop market.

Actually, though, I didn't say anything bad about it, I just quoted some well-respected Linux movers and shakers saying it. I'm sure that won't matter, though, since the Linux faithful will not tolerate any heretics blaspheming their religion. Those of you who are rational, however, will nod, since the LinuxWorld revelations are nothing new to you.

Ask any engineer, software or otherwise, and he or she'll tell you that flexibility and diversity are the bane of simplicity. The more feature-rich something is, the less simple it is to operate and use those features. And Linux is indeed perhaps the most feature-rich OS on the market right now. It's found in embedded devices, PCs, servers, mainframes, PDAs, and it's probably in a cellphone somewhere as well.

But that very flexibility has conspired against it when it comes to the mass desktop market. Average users don't care one whit about advanced virtual memory models, thread pre-emption, access to the source code, or the ability to use 12 different window managers. Corporate I.T. shops don't care about this fluff either; they want a standardized, no-frills, does-just-what-I-need-it-to-do-and-no-more workstation. They currently have this in Windows, albeit with a high price tag that nobody really wants to pay.

At the risk of even further enraging readers, I'm wondering about the possible parallels between the current Democratic nominee race and the current Linux situation. Both “parties” have vocal, unbending, irrational minorities that keep trying to drag everything to an extreme position. In both “parties,” this vocal minority is largely driven by hatred of the opposition moreso than any solid ideology.

The Democrats looked awfully close to nominating a candidate, Howard Dean, whom polls showed incapable of defeating the incumbent. Linux advocates seem intent on ramming a Linux desktop that nobody likes down everyone's throat instead of modifying and solidifying Linux into a more marketable product. The Democrats, at least, seem to have become slightly more rational after Iowa. When are the Linux faithful going to see the light?

Microsoft is not going to be beaten with desktop Linux in its current incarnation. In order to take down Redmond, Linux must become friendlier, more standardized, less diverse, and simpler to operate and maintain by non-technical personnel. It's going to have to court more developers and port more applications, and developers are going to expect and demand standards to be enforced in Linux land. In short, it's going to have to become more Windows-like without becoming bloated, slow, and bug-ridden.

I am a huge fan of competition and I want to see Microsoft's dominance lessened; but that's not going to happen as long as that vocal minority keeps saying, “It's not Linux that needs to change, it's everyone else that needs to accomodate.”

No wonder I stopped coming back to this site. - by osnews.com is better

Flame this….(12:01pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)linux is just in a different market. Most users don't care or want to figure out how to download a distro, install, configure, patch a kernal. etc. etc. But linux users are fine with it, while Microsoft users are not, so let it be? - by ThePostman

J. Eric Smith comment(12:03pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)I like to bring up J. Eric Smith comment from a couple of days ago.“There's no secret about it: Microsoft loves every single Linux zealot out there. The zealots have given Linux a bad name in many corporate entities because companies like to embrace technologies, not religions.” - by ./ is way better

not flaming(12:08pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)osnews.com IS a pretty cool site. I still start out here tho. Mostly waiting for a Goat post. That keeps me from having a geek ego. - by Not sick/Not well

True…(12:10pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)facts there. Linux is not ready for prime time on the desktop…nor will it ever unless a set of standards are used. I found it fascinating that Linux desktop is so close to Apple.

Apple has screwed up. They need to make available a PC compatible operating system. They need to wake up and realize that the reason they are getting their asses kicked by Windows (and soon Linux) is not just stability…but the hardware. Who is going to spend 500 dollars more for a computer when you can get one cheaper that does the same thing?

Linux is a very unique position that it can capitalize on. Only way it will beat out Microsoft on the desktop market, however, is to agree on a set standard for the desktop. It is great that there are many flavors of Linux…but sometimes there is too much.- by INTIMIDATOR

IDC numbers.(12:10pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)Market research company International Data Corp., of Framingham, Massachusetts, estimates that PAID shipments of Linux rose to 2.8 percent of desktop operating systems in 2002, up from 1.7 percent two years earlier.

One research company estimated that there are about 10 times more free downloads comparied to paid shipments of Linux for servers and desktops. - by bean counter

easy stuff, man(12:14pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)Linux is easy to install and configure for your laptop and desktop. All you have to do is be able to read and follow directions. - by Ike

RSS is better(12:20pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)My sysbar flashes and changes a number for total unread stories/sites (37 in the tech sector including /. and osnews). I wrote an company “portal” (think Notes-like), and we use open source freereader for personalized news (ie Browns, Tigers, Pistons, Red Wings, Ohio State get “their” news).Geek.com is one of the funniest sites on the web. I've followed the site since their “pro-linux, AMD” days (I'd guess '98). It's an interesting relationship between the site and their guests.Sorry, I gotta go, so I'll write on Novell (vendor for 15 years) and linux later. - by tech

Really? You can make Linux look/act like XP(12:20pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)“It's not Linux that needs to change, it's everyone else that needs to accomodate.”Well there is XPde desktop that looks and acts a lot like Windows XP. - by Yeah right

Standards(12:22pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)I think in order for desktop Linux to get anywhere what is needed is a standards committee(s) much like there are for web standards. That way, everyone is free to do what they want, but there are standards that developers can write for. Maybe take a page from MS's book and let the stardards committee hand out “Designed for Linux Desktop” approvals as a sign the software conforms to the standards.

——————-

“No wonder I stopped coming back to this site.” – osnews.com is better

Then how did this comment get here? Hypocrite. - by JRink

Massive push by Linux manufacturer for the desktop(12:29pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)IBM, Sun, Novell are pushing their staff to use Linux desktop for their internal staff.OSDL is pushing for Desktop and standards. OSDL had success for making Linux telecom grade. Microsoft has never attempted to get Windows telecom grade certified because it would fail. - by Desktop guy

First, your comment is self-contradictory, that's immaterial to the argument at hand.

Second, if you care to only go where people say the things you like to hear, go on. If you care to engage in reasoned, productive debate that *just* might actually lead to Linux one day displacing Microsoft, stay here and make your case.

Only a little child, afraid of viewpoints counter to his own, runs from a debate. - by J. Eric Smith

RE: Desktop guy(12:34pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)You're right, they are pushing for a Windows-free environment. They also comprise the chief competition to Windows, and two of the three sell Linux distributions. Think that has anything to do with their decision to leave Windows? Nah, couldn't be.

As for OSDL pushing for standards, they are and I think it's a great idea. However, they're obviously not pushing hard enough and fast enough to suit software developers as a whole, because many of them are still refusing to commit to Linux. The reason they consistently state is that Linux is too fragmented, too unstandardized, and too chaotic. But many in the Linux area would rather just put their fingers in their ears and hum loudly rather than listen. - by J. Eric Smith

re:But it's the 2 percent of the time” “(12:38pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)If it is only a problem 2 percent of the time…

Then obviously it is ready to take on Windows 98%…..

Sorry – couldn't resist. - by old sampler

RE: bean counter(12:40pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)IDC's surveys are the only hard numbers that anyone can verify when it comes to accurately gauging total Linux usage. The whole “people think 10 times as much has been downloaded” is just ephemeral. There's no way to prove it. A Linux protagonist would say there's at least that much. An antagonist would say there's far less.

I don't like including fuzzy figures when making an argument precisely because they can't be proven. We get enough fuzzy junk from both sides of the pro- and anti-whatever crowd, so I'm not going to add to it. Until someone can prove there are 10 times as many downloads as actual purchases, the IDC survey stands as the only verifiable number.

And, by the way, software makers look at market share when they're deciding what platforms to support. Whether you or I believe the IDC survey is irrelevant. They believe it, and their decisions reflect it. - by J. Eric Smith

J. Eric Smith(12:42pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)OSDL not push standards hard enough or fast enough to suit software developers as a whole?Well they convinced Wind River last year to join them with their linux telecom standards. Too many customers wanted to pick linux telecom products over Wind River telecom products or wanted Wind River telecom products to work with linux telecom products. Instead of Wind River slowly embracing Linux, Wind River is now gung ho and joined Linux standard committees such as OSDL and CELF. - by Desktop guy

RE: old sampler(12:44pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)I agree with you. Linux *is* 98% ready to take on Microsoft. However, if you've ever worked on any project for any length of time, you know that 80% of the work takes 20% of the time, but the remaining 20% of the work takes 80% of the time. The devil is in the details.

Linux has wondeful underpinnings. The kernel is fantastic when compared to Windows. What it needs is polish, cohesion, a sense that the entire design stems from some agreed-upon standard. Right now, a Linux distribution is built by a thousand different people, each with their own idea of what's right — and it shows. *That's* what Novell is griping about. *That's* what CodeWeaver's is griping about.

Those of us in the decision-making chairs of the corporate I.T. world know this is a problem. We know it's why Linux isn't making further and faster inroads on the desktop. The only people who don't know it are the Linux zealots, but they apparently don't know anything except that their chosen platform is perfect, and everyone else is imperfect. - by J. Eric Smith

RE: Desktop Guy(12:45pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)…what does Telecom grade have to do with Linux on the desktop?? - by just asking

As far a fragmented — I don't like what you like.. so its fragmented. The various distributions are actually more alike than the different versions of windows.

As far as unstandardized? It meets the POSIX standards much better than any other OS yet, and as for the features that are not, neither are they met in other OS distributions.

The “too chaotic..” phrase is just because they are not used to having a choice of implemetationon.

As far as “…developers … are still refusing to commit to linux.”

Might this have something to do with their contracts with MS?

As I understand it the standard “developer” for MS must pay 2K (or thereabouts) per year for that privilege, and must not work on GPL products… I don't know this for a fact, but I do remember the subject coming up in Groklaw about it. - by old sampler

Eric(12:54pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)Not to flame you, but were there any positive stories about Linux at Linuxworld or were you just looking for a negative one?

- by Rax

RE: desktop guy(12:55pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)And this is an example of how to beat the competition. Unfortunately, comparing Wind River vs. Linux to Microsoft vs. Linux isn't a very good analogy because the two target markets are vastly different.

Wind River targets embedded systems. In fact, vxWorks is running on two Mars rovers right this very minute (why didn't they use Linux?). Linux's strong suit is in the areas that *don't* directly interact with customers, exactly where vxWorks is. The two could hardly be more matched competitively.

Windows, on the other had, is in an area where human interaction is not only present, it's required. And Microsoft has set a very high bar to pass when it comes to providing end users with a comfortable, easy interface. Perhaps not as comfortable or easy as a Mac, but people seem to like it. KDE and Gnome don't cut it, even when you put XP themes on top of them. Why? Because sooner or later you almost always have to go back to the command line for *something* in Linux. Microsoft has tried very hard to totally remove the CLI from Windows, and they've largely succeeded in the desktop space (even going so far as to hide the Command Prompt link deep in the menu structure). Linux adherents, by contrast, seem to relish forcing users to type arcane commands with cryptic switches and varying syntaxes. Gee, how do I pull up help on this command? Is it “-?”? Is it “–help”? Is it “-h”? Is it no argument at all? Does a “man” page exist? An “info” page? Or is it nestled somewhere in the HOWTO areas, formatted in LaTeX?

Even doing something as esoteric as figuring out how to find *help* on a command is far too difficult for trained professionals. How do you think common users would respond to this situation? - by J. Eric Smith

I think there biggest challange(1:01pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)is getting into the largest corporations that use Microsoft. It seems that most companies have rolled out or are in the process of rolling out active directory. (The ones that didn't bail after the whole liscensing gouge). I can't see a company spending tons of money on upgrading to Win2k/2k3 and active directory and then moving to linux. Although the price is right for Linux they'd still have to run Pilot projects and train people. Those in I.T. know how hard it is just to keep up with daily workloads alone. I think Linux should play microsofts game. Have some migration services. (If they don't already.) The trick is to make it very cheap and simple to move over to there product. Maybe (if they don't already), have Linux consultants to go into companies and access there current situation. Have cheap migration costs and onsite traing. Just a thought. - by Ryan

RE: Rax(1:02pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)An honest question, and the answer is yes. Linux desktop adoption is up 64%, just as I stated. More software developers are taking an interest in the platform, but they're finding more and more to complain about the more they look. None of their complaints are showstoppers, but they are legitimate complaints that they want addressed before moving forward.

Novell is really pushing their recent Ximian/SuSE setup, and it's got a lot of people very interested in the platform. There's a real feel in the air that this combination could be *the* combo that eventually unseats Microsoft.

Linus is, of course, very committed to Linux on the desktop as I outlined in an article last week. However, like me and many others, he views the current desktop offering as lacking the polish needed to push out Microsoft. He thinks it's going to be 5-10 years before it happens. I think it's going to be towards the low end of that scale, and the fight is going to be a good one — for consumers, that is.

As I mentioned above, I'm all for competition. It makes both parties strive harder and, in Microsoft's case, reduces pricing. The worst thing we can have is a total Windows monopoly, and I think Microsoft's current pricing reflects their belief that they are a monopoly. A strong Linux desktop offering is a Good Thing, and I want it to happen. But when a huckster shows up in my conference room trying to sell me a Linux desktop that requires me to change everything we do, get all new software, and retrain all our users, *just* to get “free” software that performs no better than what we already have, I toss him out. Bring me a worthy competitor and I, like the rest of the world, will see its merits. - by J. Eric Smith

RE: more to Rax(1:08pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)Rax, I just want to get something straight between the two of us here. I don't hate Linux. Neither do I hate Microsoft. I don't purposefully go looking for anti-anything stories, I go looking for stories that will *inform*, and I hope that by informing I am doing some good.

Right now I think people *need* to be informed about subjects like this. If desktop Linux is pushed in its current state, a lot of people could end up eating their words. I know I sure wouldn't bet my job on it in its current state. The pain involved in leaving Microsoft is just too great for most companies out there — *right now*. That can, and most likely will, change in the near future, but *right now* it's a hard sell.

I'd much rather *wait* and let Linux mature and polish itself and *then* take on Microsoft from a position of strength. Right now, Linux has stability, flexibility, and price on its side. Microsoft has stability (yes, *stability*, with Win2k and later), standardization, and vast market share on its side. I don't want to see a half-baked desktop attempt make a try for the crown and fail, because if it fails then it could delay corporate adoption for a much longer time.

There, you see? I'm not the bad guy here. You and I both want the same things, we just want them in different ways. Please try to understand that. - by J. Eric Smith

MORON…(1:12pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)ERIC'S OPINION/QUOTE/Ask any engineer, software or otherwise, and he or she'll tell you that flexibility and diversity are the bane of simplicity. The more feature-rich something is, the less simple it is to operate and use those features./QUOTE/

So lets see…the five hours that I spent the other day trying to negotiate the Microsoft XP Pro file permission / JCL juggernaut is a feature? How about the fact that the piece of garbage XP Pro has a Microsoft firewall that you cannot see packetwise what it is letting out, and on investigation it lets out every packet from any application, spyware or otherwise requested from the OS or as it so desires! Talk about a piece of trash. Lets see, MS has invested how many “man hours” to get this thing right…and they continue to cludge it up. Go figure.- by system addict

This is how Geek.com's reporting news nowadays?(1:14pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)“since the Linux faithful will not tolerate any heretics blaspheming their religion”

Man… Got a lil' monkey on your back there Eric? Why don't you get that chip off your shoulder and start trying to report news items rather than trying to incite some kind of arguement with your readers?

I agree with the first post in this thread. If OSNews ever had the good taste to kick Eugenia out on her arrogant, illiterate butt, I'd never have a reason to come here. - by Logic Man

railroad and the train…(1:15pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)I think what the *nix world needs is a rich and controlled API ( isn't POSIX designed by a commity P ) that's super devolper friendly. This is required for the tools companies(borland) to make a lot of productive tools with high profit margin so they don't go broke and sell the tools very cheap (say $50 for enterprise version). I know that many commercial apps cost a lot more for *nix version cuz it just UNPRODUCTIVE to work on the *nix platform. What M$ has done so well is that VS.NET is worldclass product in terms of develper experience/productivity at very cheap price. Once that the develper's tools in place (better&cheaper than vs.net). Office-like, games will use the tools to developer apps ppl really need. *nix desktop is fine, we can let developers customize whatever and a really dump-down user for grandma. Nobody would pay $1 for Windoze if it wasn't for all the great apps on the platform from M$ and non-MS ISV alike.

- by xGeek

RE: system addict(1:16pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)“So lets see…the five hours that I spent the other day trying to negotiate the Microsoft XP Pro file permission / JCL juggernaut is a feature?”

Might I suggest a good book or some training, because you clearly don't know what you're doing if you can't figure this out.

“How about the fact that the piece of garbage XP Pro has a Microsoft firewall that you cannot see packetwise what it is letting out, and on investigation it lets out every packet from any application, spyware or otherwise requested from the OS or as it so desires!”

I want you to find for me the promise Microsoft made for their firewall to do what you mention above. Don't try very hard, though, because you won't find it. The XP Pro firewall was designed as a lowest-common-denominator firewall for *personal* use, not for corporate use. Complaining that the firewall won't log or discriminate outgoing packets is like complaining that Notepad won't do spell checking. It wasn't designed to do it in the first place, and it's ludicrous for you to denigrate it because you somehow thought it ought to do more. If you want a good Windows-based firewall, try Checkpoint. I hear they know a thing or two about them. - by J. Eric Smith

Do it the same way I do for Windows – look in the “xxx for Dummies” books – since even MS will not document the system… :-) ((just where is the help for Office?))

All of the base commands are in man pages. Even the library calls are in there, though example calls are usually missing, and exotic calls will be missing. The exotic commands are not appropriate for man pages, though some of the older ones are (vi, ex, awk, and shell … even tar).

The more exotic the utility, the more likely there is that the documentation is external – usually because it can take more than 10 pages to explain it. Man pages are designed to be summaries, not detailed explaination. And that is where the “info” pages start. After that, start looking for the documentation provided by your vendor — it may even be on the web (google IS your friend). It also may be in your local Barns&Noble, or Borders, or Amazon,…

As for “..go back to the command line for *something* “… at least it works. MS discarded the command line so long ago they have to “innovate” it again to aid remote administration…

It has been shown in several studies that a GUI does help beginners… but then starts hampering learning after that since the beginners are not allowed to advance.

Users should not fear learning. - by old sampler

Linux is almost as easy as Windows(1:21pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)Relevantive research showed that Linux is almost as easy as Windows in many tasks for newbies. In some cases, Linux is easier in some task.As first time Asians users prefer Linux to Windows as their OS.

Windows XP Help was useless to me yesterday trying to partition and format a hard disk. Try put “partition and format a hard disk” into Windows XP Help and you get nothing.From the microsoft website, I found the answer.I had to go to the command line and the cryptic code to bring up the “Computer Management”. Partition was successful, but formatting was not after two tries. Microsoft gave me “Formatting failed” after 20 minutes after formatting. I had to download a third party tool from the hard disk manufacturer. I should have brought my knoppix linux CD. At least it would have been a breeze formatting a Windows XP hard disk using knoppix linux instead of Windows XP disk manager.- by Desktop Guy

RE: old sampler(1:22pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)“It has been shown in several studies that a GUI does help beginners… but then starts hampering learning after that since the beginners are not allowed to advance.”

True enough, but define “advance?” If a beginner secretary learns to use Word and Excel and Outlook and never needs to do anything else with the system, where are they to “advance” to?

You see, here is the fundamental disconnect between tech heads and common users. To us techies, the computer is a tool. To common users, it is an appliance. We appreciate the fact that the PC, as a tool, can do many different tasks. Common users, on the other hand, can usually care less about how many tasks the system can perform. They want it to do two or three tasks very well and to devil with the rest of it. *THIS* is why Windows continues to dominate, because it does a few things very well for users. The strengths that you and I like are simply irrelevant to them. They want a toaster. You want a Swiss Army knife.

Until you, as a technical professional, realize and internalize this fact, you are in no position whatsoever to tell anyone else what to run as their desktop OS. You *must* learn what it is like to view things from the other side of the helpdesk counter. Until then, you're doing a disservice to any users you have to support. - by J. Eric Smith

re: vxWorks is running on two Mars..”(1:23pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)“In fact, vxWorks is running on two Mars rovers right this very minute (why didn't they use Linux?).”

Most likely because the projects started 10 years ago and had already committed to using vxWorks.

You might just as easily say “why didn't they use WinCE?”. ((… cause they couldn't recover from a BSOD…? :-))- by old sampler

Defective(1:27pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)So our choices seem to be between:Microsoft. A company that produces defective software as part of its business model and has been wildly successfull at gaining market share merely by extolling the virtues of its product vs its older product.

And

Linux. A platform that is defective by definition. Several different people with radically different ideas about what should be done interfering with each other such that nothing gets accomplished.

And people wonder why I use computers sparingly in my life despite being a developer of same. - by Cynic

Re: Eric(1:27pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)I am looking for better way to get the computer to become an appliance that will last 10 years before it needs to be replaced or upgraded.

We don't seem to be getting there with Windows due to the business model they have so I am looking to others.

It might be Linux, it might be Apple, or something else.

It's what should all be asking for.

- by Rax

RE: Desktop guy(1:30pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)So you tried the Windows help and it was no use to you, eh? Then you didn't try very hard, did you? Sure, if you put in “partition and format a hard disk” into the search window it yields nothing. Now, try the Index.

Gosh, what do we have here? “Format, defined”, “formatting disks, procedure for”, “formatting volumes” along with a definition of what each type of volume is and what it's used for…could this be what you weren't-so-hardly looking for?

There is no such equivalent on Linux in any of the standard distributions I'm aware of. The closest thing you might call to an index is “man -k [keyword]“, which I use quite a lot. However, you have to go to the command line to get it, and I doubt very seriously any newbie is even going to *know* about man pages, much less how to use them. With Windows, it's “Press F1″.

See what I mean about polish? It doesn't matter if the information is *there*, it matters if it's easily findable and usable. Linux can do pretty much anything, but you have to know a heckuva lot more about what you're doing in order to get it done than in Windows. - by J. Eric Smith

RE: system addict(1:32pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)ICF is and never was intended to be a “complete” firewall solution, but I think even you'd have to agree it's better than nothing. How about comparing it's ease of use to, say, any other firewall product out there? Hmm. Click and it's on. Can any other firewalls make that claim? This is all that the average Joe User out there needs for his *desktop* OS. How many destop users know (much less care) what a packet is, anyway? I think you actually picked on a good example of something MS did well from a useability standpoint. This is the kind of simplicity lots of the little or more esoteric Linux parts need. - by JRink

RE: Rax(1:34pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)“I am looking for better way to get the computer to become an appliance that will last 10 years before it needs to be replaced or upgraded.”

Unfortunately, I think Intel and AMD would prefer you replace it far more frequently. 8^)

“We don't seem to be getting there with Windows due to the business model they have so I am looking to others.”

That is debatable, but we've already trodden that ground.

“It might be Linux, it might be Apple, or something else. It's what should all be asking for.”

The principle difference here is that you've already ruled Microsoft out. I find it funny that you continue to include Mac's, though, because Apple is far more controlling of its platform than Microsoft has ever been, and from a cost standpoint they're quite pricey compared to standard PC's. Somehow I think your dismissal of Microsoft has less to do with technological reasons and more to do with ideology.

Ideology has no place in deciding technological issues. That's why you and I so violently disagree all the time. I'm above ideology, whereas it's the guiding principle in your decisions. Ideology is emotionally based arguing, and it ultimately always fails when confronted with facts and logic.- by J. Eric Smith

J. Eric Smith(1:46pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)Windows help even index was no help when formatting failed twice for a new hard disk under Windows XP. After 99% completed, I get the really friendly message “Format Failed”. That message did not help at all. At least formatting under linux gives a much better reason why format would fail. - by Desktop guy

The biggie GUI issue – lack of internal support of 3D right now it is being patched on in the back end, but it is NOT fully integrated in. One sign of this is the “unused” background to an X window, since it doesn't support 3D, it isn't used – causing a bit of extra overhead in “faking” a 3d support with drawing callbacks, and extra window definitions.

Is it a major problem.. no. More of an aggrevation, and mostly handled by the various 3d toolkits available.

“You see, here is the fundamental disconnect between tech heads and common users. To us techies, the computer is a tool. To common users, it is an appliance. We appreciate the fact that the PC, as a tool, can do many different tasks. Common users, on the other hand, can usually care less about how many tasks the system can perform. They want it to do two or three tasks very well and to devil with the rest of it.”

Ah – fear of learning … Which is what keeps people in the steno pool instead of advancing to office assistant/assistant to the VP (or even VP).

For that use just have the administrator setup the users account to use OA as the window manager.Login via XDM and you are all finished.

And I have been there… With the extra capability and learning, the receptionist became secretary… then became expert with mailing lists, and data bases. When I left she was on her way to becoming the database administrator.

Those that just wanted the simple and nothing else… stayed there, or left the company.

Ignorance can be treated. But refusing to learn is just stupid. - by old sampler

RE: Eric(1:50pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)

I was just about to spend my time criticizing your bias when I read your reply to Rax's post – and I thank you for that. But why didn't you use *that* as the base of your “commentary” and not the anti-Linux rhetoric that you posted instead?

Your tolerance for the childish posting (ala system addict) has significantly dropped in the past year. One can't blame you for that. But you, and Geek.com in general – have a responsibility to attempt to remain unbiased in your postings. If its the case that Geek.Com is a not _news_ site anymore, then state that. At least thats always been the precedent around here despite the “opinion” tag on the postings.

Your post was in itself flame bait – you refer to Linux users as “the faithful” and the OS as their “religion”. What sort of responses to you expect from that?

I'm pleading with you to be more impartial. Be more like your response to Rax and less like the “I've got a bone to pick with those childish Linux users”. Please.

- by chris

Although my business has vendor status, (1:56pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)we don't sell software. We provide DP for the professions, a service (ie no sales tax). We provide vertical market software (sometimes hardware) but we charge for creating documents. You maybe familiar with vertical medical office software (we provide our own) or data entry screen for legal offices, we charge for the delivery of 8 60 page docs in 4 formats over 6 months to the court for a bankruptcy as examples. For a long time Novell's connection services were the ONLY SMB choice, so we install quite a few copies. I have received an email a day from Novell about linux and have not read one. Now that discloser is over, I'll get to my opinion.What Novell and J. Eric Smith are saying is correct. Novell is at a real advantage right now because the years while Microsoft has been creating XP and Longhorn, Novell has been improving their product. It's been over 2 years since Novell products run on EVERYTHING and is accessible EVERYWHERE there's web access. NWs desktop for years was netadmin and groupwise but today they have many desktops. Novell NEEDS linux to have A desktop. I used Mandrake(3yrs), Cygwin (2yrs), Morphix (2yrs), & others, and worked with python open source development. Both KDE and Gnome are full desktops, but I am not recommending them for user desktop use at this time. Another service my firm provides IT consulting for about 200 corps. If Novell can get linux competitors to go with Ximian, we could see a single face on linux (of course to Novell's advantage). - by tech

xman(1:58pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)“There is no such equivalent on Linux in any of the standard distributions I'm aware of.”

sure there is – xman. Provides both index and content.

“The closest thing you might call to an index is “man -k [keyword]“, which I use quite a lot. However, you have to go to the command line to get it, and I doubt very seriously any newbie is even going to *know* about man pages, much less how to use them. With Windows, it's “Press F1″.”

Only if you insist. xman does a tolerable job. And both gnome and KDE provde the equivalent that includes their documentation in a pritter form (check the “help” button, normally in the upper right in the top menu bar) and includes searching the man pages as options.

And every distribution I've gotten included a “how to get help” tutorial. It is even in all the “unix/linux/… for dummies” books.

It really isn't that bad – just different. (Has MS patented the “F1″ key yet? :-)- by old sampler

Fear the penguin.(2:28pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)Mpst people would have said Linux would never hit the desktop. The fact that it is closing in on Apple should be a red flag to the folks in Redmond.

Novell and others interested in exacting a little revenge will get the desktop distro under control… and they'll offer support…

MS is in hot water… - by LV

Windows sucks, but runs my games(2:31pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)One word, proprietary code. You make something work for this and than that it's not gonna work as good for that then this. Linux dominates the we don't have any money to waste on windows licencing market. So as microsoft slowly grows beyond the pocket book of the middle class we will have to make linux work or they won't let us have anything. YOU GOTTA STAND UP FOR YOUR RIGHTS. and to do this you have to study and research on how to survive and in this day on age, knowing how to install a application with a simple script should be common sense. or don't bitch about it when you are to stupid to figure it out. Cryptonomicon is a good book…just starting reading it. - by pissed off

No doubt(2:50pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)I have no trouble believing there are 10 times as many downloads as actual purchases. I have three sets of iso's right now collecting dust and I'd bet that there are many people out there who, like me downloaded and installed them out of curiosity, but ended up removing them. I think they are cool yes but eventually I'll want to do something that requires getting too far “under the hood” for my taste and give up on it. Maybe I'll set up a dual boot system next time so I can mess with it in my spare time. - by gliss

Comparison with cars(3:07pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)What if you bought a cheap car but got a big box of stuff you had to install to make it work. I.e., carburator, water-pump, sterio, exhaust system. Well the gear-heads would love it, but most everyone else would hate it because there is little support available for those who can't tell an exhaust manifold from camshaft.

Your other option was a car that came complete, but had a nasty habit of just dieing in the middle of the freeway or all the sudden the stereo doesn't work and you have to get a patch (that may or maynot work) from the manufacturer. And when you shut it off, sometimes it just keeps running and you have to pop the hood and disconnect the battery.

Or you can buy a machine that works well and comes complete, but you have to pay three times the price of the others.

Somebody please give me a better solution that Microsoft. - by Cynic

Way off topic(3:29pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)I'm no legal scholar, but it now appears that SCOs newest suit of the week against Novell is saying that Novell made mistakes while filling out the original System V patent forms and that is why, last week SCO filed for the patents to System V. In the following docs, you'll see that the US PO, agrees with Novell that the licenses for System V were NEVER transfered to SCO, but excluded. SCO has NEVER had the rights to System V.

Unfortunately, this plays right into SCOs hands, and they will try to force Novell and IBM to prove every line of code is theirs giving SCO their 5 years of anti-linux marketing for Microsoft. - by chuckle

Ease of install is lacking(3:40pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)Linux is very easy to use true, but those that have grown up on Windows have diffilcuty performing tasks, like installing drivers, or programs. “What I have to compile the program??” Some RPM based distros have made this easier, but its still nowhere as easy as Windows has made those tasks. - by Rob

RE: old sampler(3:45pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)“Is it a major problem.. no. More of an aggrevation, and mostly handled by the various 3d toolkits available.”

And in one (kind of) sentence, you've summed up the primary gripe that I have about Linux. No, not the 3D thing, the “more of an aggravation” thing. Look, you're obviously a technical professional. So am I. I've been in this line of work more than twenty years. You and I tolerate aggravations because we understand how things work under the skin of software and hardware. An OS is a complex piece of software, perhaps one of the most complex types of code there is to write given all it is expected to do. If I have to go out of my way to do something in an unusual (dare I say “odd”) fashion, I accept it as a consequence of whatever added flexibility and functionality may come with whatever OS I'm using. But that's me.

Users, on the other hand, are far more finicky. Ask a heldesk guy sometime just how hard users try to solve their own problems. Most of them can't even use help systems that are practically plastered to their desktop. They have no patience for anything at all. They expect things to work right the first time, immediately, and without any weirdness (as defined by “anything I'm not used to”). Quite frankly, users have rejected Linux on the desktop because of this. Perhaps they would've rejected Windows as well if there had been something else in place fifteen years ago, but there wasn't. Now Windows is the de facto standard by which all users judge other OS's. If it isn't as pretty as Windows, as easy to use as Windows, and as intuitive as Windows, they don't want it. And keep in mind that a user's definition of the above terms can be radically different than your or my definition of same. However, it is not our place to tell them they are wrong, especially when they (users) outnumber us (tech heads) substantially.

And let's not neglect the application angle. Right now, there's a Linux analogue of just about every Windows application there is. The problem is, most of the time that analogue isn't anywhere as polished, stable, feature-rich, compatible, or supported as the Windows alternative. There are exceptions to be sure, but I'm not arguing the exceptions. Although “movie guy” will no doubt try to post volumes of links to the contrary, GIMP is not considered to be a viable total Photoshop replacment by art professionals (that's not me talking, that's them). OpenOffice and StarOffice work great by themselves but don't support macros and templates in Word and Excel documents, a crucial feature if your job involves exchanging data with other firms that *don't* use OpenOffice or StarOffice. Ximian's Evolution mail client is as close to being an Outlook clone (without all of Outlook's vulnerabilities, thank God) but lacks the ability to integrate with a good groupware back end like Exchange (although there are several up-and-coming packages that are looking better all the time).

I could go on, but you you get the point. Linux, and its associated applications, have achieved *technically* all they need in order to compete in the market. And *technically*, I could weld, rivet, and glue my own automobile together and market it next to a Mercedes, Cadillac, or BMW. Mine might be every bit as powerful and agile as my competition, but if it doesn't *look* and *feel* polished, smooth, professional…I've lost. I might win if all the buyer shops is on 0-60 times, but that market is pretty small. The big bucks, and big success, lies with attracting the buyer with lots of cash (corporate clients) and clout (same). Linux *needs* to compete in that space if for no other reason than to scare Microsoft into lowering prices and improving its product. But to do so prematurely could give those potential buyers an unpleasant experience (think Yugo, a dependable, low-cost, functional car that nobody wanted), an experience that might make them Linux-averse in the future.

And the future is what we're all after.

- by J. Eric Smith

RE: chris(3:57pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)“But why didn't you use *that* as the base of your “commentary” and not the anti-Linux rhetoric that you posted instead? “

Because I didn't find my commentary to be anti-Linux rhetoric, that's why. Look, the common misperception here is that I'm anti-Linux. That's wrong. I'm *anti-Linux zealot*. No more, no less. I'm also anti-MS zealot for the same reason. I quite frequently disagree with WD because I feel he would defend Microsoft even if Bill Gates were found in bed with a live boy or a dead girl (to quote a famous politician). Life it too short to take up such trivial causes as “my OS is better than your OS” arguments. It's childish and immature, if you ask me, which is why I take some perverse delight in trying to point that out on a regular basis.

“Your tolerance for the childish posting (ala system addict) has significantly dropped in the past year. One can't blame you for that. But you, and Geek.com in general – have a responsibility to attempt to remain unbiased in your postings. If its the case that Geek.Com is a not _news_ site anymore, then state that. At least thats always been the precedent around here despite the “opinion” tag on the postings.”

I know my tolerance has dropped. I guess I foolishly expect people to actually learn from the debates that go on in here. Instead, people just seem to get more rigid. Disappointing.

As for the bias vs. news thing, suffice to say that I'm never going to be able to please anyone. If the article is the slightest bit noncomplimentary, and news is about bad things as much as good things, then someone will scream bias. Quite honestly I try not to pay it much mind unless someone can actually pinpoint something that's not true. Thus far, no one's been able to do so. In fact, if you carefully re-read the “NEWS” section, you'll not find anything that's not either spoken by someone else or factually provable. The “OPINION” section is different, but that's why it's called “OPINION.”

“Your post was in itself flame bait – you refer to Linux users as “the faithful” and the OS as their “religion”. What sort of responses to you expect from that?”

First off, the term “the faithful” doesn't have to be a derogatory adjective, and that's not how I use it. “The faithful”, “adherents”, “proponents”, “advocates”…whatever. It's a descriptive noun. Please don't try to read into something that isn't there. People who see such trivial stuff as flamebait are generally those wandering around with a chip on their shoulder on the first place. I sincerely hope you do not fall into that camp.

“I'm pleading with you to be more impartial. Be more like your response to Rax and less like the “I've got a bone to pick with those childish Linux users”. Please.”

I'll take your suggestion under advisement, but I do, in fact, have a bone to pick with childish Linux users. I believe in the Linux platform. I want to do everything I can to bring it to fruition. Thus, I think you can understand why I get angry and frustrated with any who would give it a bad name. Zealots of any stripe give it a bad name. Their fervency, their dogma, makes it very difficult for me to pitch Linux as an enterprise solution to much of anything inside the firewall. The CEO's, President's, COO's, CIO's, and so forth that I meet almost always see Linux as a cool toy maintained by long-haired geeks with pierced tongues and lots of attitude. The zealots indirectly do everything they can to reinforce that image, and it makes *my* job more difficult because of it. They also have a side affect of not allowing *any* constructive criticism of the Linux platform, which leads to a stagnation in maturity.

This all hurts the platform, and I try my best to point out how others are making all of our lives more difficult by being so damned inflexible. - by J. Eric Smith

Two words GROW and UP(4:04pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)Cmon guys, these arguments are a bit rediculous. If the guys who stand to make the largest amount of money off of Linux succeeding say it is not ready for desktop use, then why argue the point or be pissed about it? The fact is that Linux is still a baby and its parents need to work together, as in get a more defined standand in the fields most complained about by end users.

As to those who complain about geek.com If you want us to get you some diapers then be our guest, but do the world a favor and stop saying that you “Go somewhere else for your news.” IF that were the case, then what the hell are you doing reading Geek.com posts? - by Eric the Red

RE: Cynic(4:06pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)You've described the who Linux vs. Windows vs OSX far better than I could. Linux does resemble a bunch of car parts, Windows does resemble a pre-assembled car that has a tendency to break, and OSX does resemble a smooth, pretty car that costs a bundle.

I want a better solution as well, which is why I like griping about all of the current solutions. - by J. Eric Smith

Re:cynic(4:17pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)“Linux. A platform that is defective by definition. Several different people with radically different ideas about what should be done interfering with each other such that nothing gets accomplished.”

Linux is a very good Server and is starting to working the desktop market. this has been the focus for about 3 years now and many companies are comming up with solutions. Some good and some not so good.

Linux is not defective, it is a great work in progress. It is not perfect but it is a great product that belongs to the world and not one company.

I like that IBM Child ad for Linux. This is a new concept, an OS that belongs to no one but can be adopted by everyone.

This is a concept for a new and better world.

I guess I could be a zealot after all. :)

- by Rax

J. Eric Smith(4:27pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)said the words I was too lazy to type. There is a lot involved with changing a desktop. Smith brought up the point of tech support, but there is so much more. Corps need to be “ready” to change by having many pieces in place. The problem is not with KDE or Gnome, but with IT readiness. A little off topic, but I also receive snail mail everyday from Novell that I also don't read. I scanned it today because it included passes to Brainshare 2004 which I will not attend unless they pay my expenses (Ohio-Utah…) to attend. There seems to be a major push to wards “migrating to linux with ZenWorks and Red Carpet” and “rapid deployment of desktops using ZenWorks”. You have to admit with Zen, Novell has the prefect vehicle for migration, but they also talk about “the future of linux desktop” in my opinion because it's almost there. With NW, Groupwise, eDir, dirXML, NNLS, Nterprise, ExteNd, and Nsure Novell is ready to attack every market Microsoft is in. - by tech

Rax(5:00pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)I didn't mean that linux is built to be defective, I meant that the idea is a bit defective. It is targeted to a few and most of your people don't know what to do with it and which kernel they need and the differences between them and how to make all this stuff work together.

I hate Windows, but I plug in a sound card, load a driver and it often works only to go hay-wire a few months later because the latest MS patch hosed my computer and I need all this updated crap. With Linux, you can easily spend days trying figure out why you HW doesn't work and many people give up long before that.

I want an alternative to Micrsoft garbage on my desktop at home and in the office and there just isn't one. MS is content to make defective SW because they can sell as better than their last version. (Imagine if Ford did this: the new Mustang may be crap compared to Brand X, but it is better than last year's model) But MS has no competent competition so they make money selling upgrades to new versions every other year because the last version was defective and full of holes.[/RANT] - by Cynic

Continued…(5:04pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)This allows Microsoft to milk the market. It is more profitable to release a marginal OS and Office Suite than it is to spend the resources getting the bugs out. If they had competent competition, they couldn't milk the public like this.

Everyone believes that they need Windows and MS Office and Internet Explorer and etc. And now MS wants to control my home entertainment center too? NO thanks. - by Cynical Cynic

The Biz Folk Are In Control Now(5:26pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)The days of wasted effort on making apps theme-able before basic functionality is written are over. The days of competing software packages based on licensing disputes are over. The days of thousands of worthless 0.1 SourceForge projects are over. All that is now a sideshow to the real action.

The Biz folk are driving Linux now and they don't give a damn about anything the open source crowd cares about, they are in a stamped to either turn Linux into a product to sell or into a vehicle to sell product. Shit will get done/fixed/implemented and out the door.

Millions/billions of dollars are now riding on Linux. Piddly crap like competing widgets or non-standard install directories that have plagued Linux are going to be solved very soon.

- by UnixBlue

re: eric(5:34pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)users have rejected Linux —

Not many have actually tried it.

“OpenOffice and StarOffice work great by themselves but don't support macros and templates in Word and Excel documents,…”

They better not – the macro language is copyrighted by MS. Any attempt to do that WILL get legal problems.

“…integrate with a good groupware back end like Exchange..”

Again (meaning interoperability with exchange here) – unless MS changes their rules, it cannot legally do so. Reverse engineering the protocol is not allowed.

“The big bucks, and big success, lies with attracting the buyer with lots of cash (corporate clients) and clout (same).”

Yup – and IBM should be just big enough, plus having the wallet big enough to pay for smoothing out the rough edges and educating business.

And as far as the general “anything I'm not used to” reference – It will depend on MS permitting a near total (if not total) duplication of the “look and feel” of a windows system. And they SURE aren't going to allow that. There have already been copyright lawsuits over “look and feel” before.

Just look at the effort MS is taking now to prevent compatability – patenting an XML schema???? Have you ever noticed that little 'here?s' type character? (if you use Netscape/Mozilla/…) It is not in the standard alphabet – (it is an apostrophe, but expressed as character 0xff.. or was it 0xf7.. dont remember- it's whatever MS word uses for an apostrophe when converting to HTML).

Don't ever expect “identical” or even nearly identical operation.

Linux will HAVE to be different – not just better. And users will have to accept that “different” is not bad.- by old sampler

Dean's Poll Numbers(6:01pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)Howard Dean's poll numbers against Bush were not appreciably different from any other candidate up until the last two weeks. Dean is already erasing his Iowa slide in the polls. All jokes aside, Howard Dean is not some wild-eyed radical. His political record and current positions are moderate.

You've got a point with Linux zealotry. However, your political arguments don't hold water. Stick to technology reporting. - by Carl

One is taken to wondering why. Perhaps it's because they find it too difficult, too tedious, and not rewarding enough? Just a guess.

“They better not – the macro language is copyrighted by MS. Any attempt to do that WILL get legal problems.”

Not if it was reverse engineered, a time-honored tradition practiced by many in the software and hardware world. And note I was not referring to “the macro language” per se, I was referring to the interpreter of that language. If Star/OpenOffice could clean-room build in an interpreter that performs identically (functionality-wise) to MS Office, I'd buy it (or download it) in a second. So would a lot of other people. It's a stable, useful package. It's main weakness is less than full compatiblity with the de facto document juggernaut, MS Office.

Yes, it is. The very concept of patents and copyrights specifically allows clean-room reverse engineering. The problem is, Microsoft publishes no specs and jealously guards their protocol. It's also encrypted, compressed, and probably folded, spindled, and mutilated by the time it gets to the wire. A direct copy is, indeed, illegal, but if someone were to create a clean-room program that mimics an Exchange server, it would not be illegal. MS would probably still sue, but they would lose to any competent defense.

“Yup – and IBM should be just big enough, plus having the wallet big enough to pay for smoothing out the rough edges and educating business.”

IBM, while huge, is neither a significant fraction of the entire business world nor is it able to overly influence others like it did a quarter century ago. It's a good step for Linux, but it's only an additional .01% of the way to the finish line. Ditto for Novell and Sun. And let's not forget that IBM continues to be one of the largest resellers of Windows in the world. They're obviously not dumb enough that they've stopped selling Windows and are push Linux exclusively. Market suicide that would be.

“Don't ever expect “identical” or even nearly identical operation.”

That's what IBM used to say about Compaq, and look what happened there.

“Linux will HAVE to be different – not just better. And users will have to accept that “different” is not bad.”

Different isn't necessarily “good” either. The difference *must*, however, have a positive impact on the end user. Give a Linux box to an MS Word user. “There,” you say, “now you have an open source, crash-proof operating system!”

“But where's Word,” says the befuddled user.

“Here, use this OpenOffice clone instead,” you say.

“But it won't open most of my current documents because they use templates or macros,” whines the user.

“But…but…you've got an open source, fully pre-emptive, crash-proof, free operating system with thousands of free applications!” you implore.

“But I didn't *need* that!” screams the user. “I just needed to be able to open my Word files!”

You stalk off griping about users needing to learn new things. The user is unable to do their job. They complain to their manager. The manager complains to your manager. Sooner or later somebody in management says “who's the idiot who started putting Linux on the desktop without first making sure it could do everything we currently do with Windows?”

The first rule of any piece of software is that it must do what the user needs it to do. If you can make do with Star/OpenOffice, GIMP, Konqueror, Evolution, and so forth, switch and be happy. If you can't then any attempt to force-fit Linux onto the situation will result in little more than pissed off people. Pissed off people don't generally form good opinions of the products that pissed them off…nor of the people who forced them onto it without a good reason. - by J. Eric Smith

Gotta disagree with just a couple of points Smith(6:16pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)1. I've been involved with programming for over 20 years and have NEVER been involved with any software house that uses reverse engineering. You got that from your association with MS, but don't put it on the honest programmers (where do you think all these open source programmers came from?).2. I've never had a Open Office doc not open, so I'm not sure what you're talking about. I think you read it from a MS lab report. For that matter, what tech is going to change a users desktop without testing it on production. Your example is pure fantasy. - by tech

Eric(6:49pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)Love your stuff. Keep it up. It's people like you that are going to finally make it happen. (Just a little note of appreciation)- by Nobody Special

RE: tech(8:04pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)1. Never? Well, it's not that common because there isn't that much to be gained in reverse engineering except in very specific circumstances. However, when it is beneficial, people most certainly do it. Ever hear of Samba? It's a reverse engineered implementation of Microsoft's SMB protocol.

And don't act like reverse engineering is some sort of stealing or underhanded activity. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, and if it takes reverse-engineering Microsoft Exchange's protocol to make either Ximian talk directly to Outlook or Outlook talk directly to some open-source Exchange clone, I'm all for it.

2. So you've never had an OpenOffice doc not open? Good for you. That wasn't the question. Perhaps you ought to read my posts a little more closely.

If you *had* read a bit more closely, you'd have known that the point was OpenOffice's inability to open *any* MS Word document with embedded Macro's or templates. Or, perhaps I should be more specific in stating that the file *will* open, but the embedded stuff will not function. If you depend upon these macros (and some documents do), then the lack of functionality equates to “not opening.” Unembedded MS Word files will open fine, but I frequently find formatting errors in them. When resaved, MS Word opens them but also usually finds formatting errors. Clearly OpenOffice's MS Word parsing engine is good, but not 100% compatible. This is Microsoft's fault for keeping the spec secret, but that doesn't change the fact that OpenOffice can't function at 100% compatiblity because of it.

By the way, your “pure fantasy” comment was insulting. And, based upon my responses outlined above, it was also wrong. Please try to read the posts more closely next time and try formulating a better argument. I have a nasty habit of biting the head off of people who come at me with ill-formed arguments that don't hold up. - by J. Eric Smith

RE: Carl(8:20pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)“All jokes aside, Howard Dean is not some wild-eyed radical. His political record and current positions are moderate.”

After Dean's meltdown “Yeaaagh!” scream last week in Iowa, you're going to have a hard time convincing me he's not a wild-eyed anything. Howard needs to start drinking decaf if that's his demeanor. I sure as heck don't want nuclear weapons at the disposal of someone who looks like his head is fixing to explode on national television.

And as for Dean being a “moderate,” I guess that depends on where you sit politically. If Dean's a “moderate” then Clinton's a right winger and Lenin was a centrist. I'd really hate to see what your idea of a left-winger would be like. - by J. Eric Smith

J. Eric Smith, I lost respect for Dean as well, but(9:30pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)1. Never. Again, your view is that of MS that reverse engineering and stealing IP is OK. That does not mean those with morals who feel theft is wrong are going to agree with you.2. I have no problem reading. You have a big problem with not forcing everyone to agree with you. I have seen this often in meetings with MSCE. They will call names, swear, scream because they are not going to get their way.3. You'd better watch out for tech support replacing a your car with a plane that you don't have a license to fly, or replacing your chair with an elephant and having your boss screaming because you won't use your PC underwater. You sound like Rick, trying to be a sci-fi writer. - by tech

RE: tech(10:27pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)“1. Never. Again, your view is that of MS that reverse engineering and stealing IP is OK. That does not mean those with morals who feel theft is wrong are going to agree with you.”

Why must you always paint your enemy as some sort of MS supporter? Have you ever stopped for a moment, just a tiny fraction of second, to consider that it's not *all* about Microsoft?

And as far as “stealing,” as you so eloquently put it, I guess the entire Samba team is guilty of stealing, then. They take a Linux box and, using the SMB protocol used by Microsoft for Microsoft networking over IP, use it to make a Linux box masquerade as a Window file and print server. It does it so well that it actually runs SMB faster than Windows 2003 does natively, albeit without a lot of the advanced permission and file attribute functions. But they're all crooks, every one of them, according to you. And, apparently, Microsoft told them to do it — according to you.

“2. I have no problem reading. You have a big problem with not forcing everyone to agree with you. I have seen this often in meetings with MSCE. They will call names, swear, scream because they are not going to get their way.”

I'm not forcing you to agree with me, I'm forcing you to tell the truth and not make up lies. And I'd love to know how many “MSCE's” you've had call you names because there's no such certification. Perhaps you were referring to MCSE's? Or were you in such a hurry to make something up that you forgot how to spell? Not only do you have a problem reading, but you can't write. You apparently can't think very well, either. No wonder others swear at you.

“3. You'd better watch out for tech support replacing a your car with a plane that you don't have a license to fly, or replacing your chair with an elephant and having your boss screaming because you won't use your PC underwater. You sound like Rick, trying to be a sci-fi writer.”

Huh? Are you drunk? You're not making any sense. Who brought up elephants and airplanes?

Less bong. More thought. Try it. - by J. Eric Smith

good job eric(11:06pm EST Mon Jan 26 2004)You seem to bring everybody out of the woodwork with your articles. :) BTW some of you people make me sick with the degrading hateful comments. - by IronSmith

Tell you what(12:01am EST Tue Jan 27 2004)tech, when you can grow up and stop being such a potty mouth, I'll quit deleting your posts. How's that for an even trade? You get a chance to make intelligent comments (if you're capable of it) and I won't delete your posts. It's so simple even you can figure it out.

Oh, and as for the I'm-so-cute-I-won't-post-my-name zealot again, you're getting deleted as usual. One of these days you might grasp the convoluted concept of signing your posts, but until then you're just going to get deleted. And if you keep up this behavior, your IP block will be banned as well, permanently if need be. - by J. Eric Smith

Big baby(4:40am EST Tue Jan 27 2004)I'd put my *very* recent Linux experiences about equal what I experienced with Windows 95 and 98, as far as ease of install and dealing with hardware compatibility issues. Linux software is not all that bad for me. Open Office 1.1 and Gimp were an easy transistion from MS Office and Photoshop. It will take a year or so before I master Open Office with all the features, and I only cussed at it a few times so far.

I am learning from the easier “newbie” rated distros from Mandrake, Debian and Red Hat. I'll be testing some Live CDs in the next few weeks.

Did not appreciate having to go to the Linux command line to turn “on” my USB mouse, twidle the sound before it would work – and my modem in Mandrake 9.2 was infuriating, although I did finally get it going.

Maybe it is a sign of my getting older or just the fact I am lazy, but I really don't want to master another friggin command line. I didn't want to learn DMAs and IRQs in Win 3.1 and 95 either – or having to recover systems where Win98/ME got stupid and forget how to work with a modem or network.

Just seems the kind of crap we had to put up with to get Microsoft where it is today, we should pay no more than $100 for a top of the line MS desktop OS. After all the post release beta testing and debugging done by the consumers, it would be nice to see the benifits of carrying MS all these years.

Kinda disgusts me – that recent report on MS having a $10 billion quarter after all the frustration, panic and pure stress we endured over the many years… I want my payoff – I want my $40 dollar OS/Office package just like they offer Thailand damnit!

For myself, MS has the option of cutting prices drastically worldwide or they will see me switching everyone I can influence to Linux this year.. well, after I have come off the bottom of the Linux learning curve.

Just spent the last two days fixing a MS PC from a horrid amount of spyware and trojans. I just don't have any faith in secure computing from MS when I see they actually participate in distrubuting machine exploitations. I did spend a fair amount of time educating the owner of the PC on security and use of the protection software I installed.

I'd much rather play tech support for a a few dozen frustrating Linux boxes than to participate in another $10 billion dollar quarter for MS. They should never have given Thailand such a bargain, cause now I want my bargain price too… I am very childish in that respect! - by Zeke

Big Baby(8:50am EST Tue Jan 27 2004)I'll add my own experiences. I'm a user, not really an expert. Started with DOS, played with OS/2, settled on Windows NT4 followed by 2000, chose Mandrake Linux for my home network server, but admit that I am very much a beginner with Linux.

I use computers with DTP programs, mainly PageMaker, and Graphics programs. I also use standard Office applications as well as e-mail, browsing and FTPing — the kinds of thing that OpenOffice.org handles reasonably well. Pretty standard stuff for Windows, not entirely so for Linux.

I don't want hassles with any of my computers, because, as primary worker on the network, as well as network administrator and helpdesk for my daughters and myself, every hassle means that much less productive work time.

Frankly, if I have a Windows 2000 problem, I can usually sort it out from Windows 2000 for Dummies, the Windows Help system or rat cunning.

On the other hand, when I was setting up the Linux network, there were issues that the official Mandrake manuals didn't even mention, but which were covered by a plethora of conflicting articles on the Internet, some even written for my particular distribution.

In the end, I gave up on some things I wanted to do because I have work to do, and the information from Linux geeks was incomprehensible, badly written, skipped important parts, or was just plain wrong.

Yes, Linux works, and the bits of it I could get working work well and without missing a beat once they are sorted out. I wish Windows had more Linux-like underlying scripts for when the wizards and handholding don't quite work.

But I know that, even for a competent user of my own level, Linux does not yet work out of the box with anything like the ease that anything Windows does. And, until that is addressed, people wanting to work will not want Linux.

- by peter_g

RE: Zeke(9:44am EST Tue Jan 27 2004)“They should never have given Thailand such a bargain, cause now I want my bargain price too… I am very childish in that respect!”

You're not childish, you just want what everyone else wants from their software: value. While I think the Thailand price is perhaps too low (I'd gladly pay $200 for a WindowsXP/MS Office Pro bundle, which is what we do actually pay with corporate pricing), I think we're going to see much more competitive pricing from Redmond in the next couple of years. It's almost a foregone conclusion.

Linux is getting better. As many have noted above, their experiences with it today are far better than three or four years ago. Logically, Linux should catch up to Microsoft's current position in usability, if not in software availability, in the next three to five years. The question then becomes, where will Microsoft be that day? Unless Microsoft comes out with some sort of “killer app” that only they can produce, they'll have a difficult time justifying their pricing level. I don't think Microsoft (or anyone else, for that matter) is going to come out with any paradigm-shifting ideas in the next five years, so that makes the end product (the OS) a relatively static target. That's very bad for Microsoft, so I think they're going to end up competing on price and merit.

Competing on price against a free product is a difficult proposition, although not all Linux's are free (RHEL, for example). Corporate customers will still buy the commercial packages even if it could be downloaded freely if only to get the support they need. Merit-wise, Microsoft is doing a very good job of cleaning up the security in its OS (less so in Office as evidenced by today's worm, but that's another topic). But Linux has a lot of merit already, so it comes back to pricing.

Microsoft simply has to make it easier to stay with their product than it is to switch to Linux. The only way I see them doing that is by drastically lowering price. The old hold-'em-forever-with-a-proprietary-system model is dying, and if Microsoft persists in pushing it, the backlash will be severe. Microsoft is going to have to give people a good reason to stay with their platform when Linux and its application base reaches maturity. So I'm looking forward to vastly cheaper software in the very near future no matter which platform I end up supporting. - by J. Eric Smith

And I did mean a copyright on the macro language itself. For all I know, they could have patented it under a “process” implementation.

MS won the last “Look and feel” lawsuit. So I don't expect the macros to be portable.

“Microsoft simply has to make it easier to stay…”

It's called “vendor lockin”.1. propriatary file formats (And I think embeded macros may fit in this too)2. trade secrets3. language use restrictions4. trivial encryption.5. bad laws engineered to prevent reverse engineering.6. EULA restrictions7. Undocumented interfaces8. non-standard standards (ie – almost meet a standard, then call it the standard… and add some little crap to make the real standard incompatable, like they did with Kerberos).

And it is the only thing MS has going for itself.- by old sampler

RE: Productive Debate HA HA(4:21am EST Wed Jan 28 2004)Once upon a time I debated, and tried to make my case, with points against MicroSoft, but I was literally Censored, Blocked and eventually chased away from this site because of my opinion about a ROUGE software company called MicroSoft. Rob, and Steven among others had me Banned from this site. You Lamers only want to hear what you want to hear and not the TRUTH.- by WhackedOut

Too many toys…(6:49am EST Wed Jan 28 2004)Odd.I reckon if us forced-to-be Windows users (because of our jobs) actually wrote down in a week the tools we use, it'd be a very small list.Then, when you install your latest, greatest Linux disti, only install those exact same (equivalent) tools.For instance, in the last week or so I've used a Browser, Powerpoint, Microsoft Word, Outlook and a calculator. Nothing else.So, load Mozilla, OpenOffice, Kalc, and Evolution. Nothing else.I reckon if you loaded that lot on an average office user's desktop, they' be happy as Larry.It's our tendency to 'tinker' that's the problem….Too many toys… - by Andy

Where's the problem?(8:02am EST Wed Jan 28 2004)By now, I — biologist, no techie — have installed Linux on seven computers (three laptops among these), and I didn't encounter any problems — SuSE's installer (from 7.1 onward) did it all for me. One of the laptops used to run WinNT 4.0 before, with the touchpad not working. Now, using Linux, it works fine — without any fiddling around with configuration files. So where's the problem? All you need is a decent installer, and you can use that one. It's GPL too.

Speaking of Word, I did not have trouble opening any recent Word file in OpenOffice so far but I had big trouble trying to get an old (1993) Word 2.0 file opened on *any* computer. Word2k (or was it 2003?) flatly refused to accept. Maybe OpenOffice's XML technology will allow documents to be legible for more than just a few years… Up to then, I will use LaTeX.

To sum it up, most of the technology is available, but for some obscure reason many folks don't see it, don't use it, and claim that it is not there. Cui bono?- by ophis

Where's the problem? (Again)(8:33am EST Wed Jan 28 2004)At this moment I have three pc running Linux and a Mac. I never paid for Linux so I am not part of IDC research.Though I don't hate Microsoft or Apple I do LOVE Linux.You can use what you want, but don't touch my penguin! - by giadrago

linux desktop(9:14am EST Wed Jan 28 2004)I agree with you. I use linux and love linux. But there is definitely a lot of room for improvement. Hopefull this will occur in time. - by John smith

Windows – by any other name …(9:22am EST Wed Jan 28 2004)… if you make Linux completely like Windows you are admitting they have a better design, like if all car companies : say honda / toyota … started to emulate GM or VW (god forbid).Or it's like telling someone, you cannot change car cies because the levers are in different positions (oh – well I can't drive then…). = ALL such propositions are ridiculous !

-> What we do need is some form of standardization, they if any cie creates an app – it will run on any distro.Then again seems like the packaged apps like Mozilla / Realplayer / Adobe / O-Office do well in that department (I've installed all those on various distros debian/rpm-based…all successfuly).This is what we need more of.I don't think many users will run away from software because they need to open a console and type something (plainly listed in the README file) that says : CD to appropriate directory and type : ./install or ./setup whatever – which in turn runs a GUI installer.

But to expect most user (some admittedly clueless) put all the right paths in the profile files, and complete missing libraries, then run the ./configure, make, make install & more (and see it fail because wrong version of libc6.o .. is … just not going to happen.

-> Also GAMES is a big factor (ask your windows counterpart what is the % of time is spends typing letters, doing spreadsheets, email, VS surfing the net and playing the latest version of WINGAME (on 2 DvDs) … and you'll see why Linux isn't everywhere (but then again – why should it be ?).

With the fact that HDW changes (supposedly improves) all the time, and the complexity of what we do with these units – it will never have the simplicity of a toaster, so people need to be educated about it

It's not the fear of reasoned debate that may drive people from geek.com or articles that criticize this or that, it's the tone with which the articles are written. The tone of this article, for example, is baiting and inflammatory.

On a personal level one can make a variety of arguments for choosing any one OS over another. Many of these arguments do have merit, which speaks to the fact that any one of the major OS's currently available will be sufficient for a great many end users. I've used both MS Windows and Linux and, for my particular purposes, have found either to be a sufficient desktop OS.

In the field of end users, however, I believe the real impediment to the take-up of Linux on the average desktop is inertia, not the complexity of the OS. I've installed MS Windows from 3.x to XP and it's not always a smooth task. But then why would anyone _want_ to install a computer OS. Most don't, that's probably why there are so many MS Windows 9x users at for the SoHo market. For enterprise users, it would seem to be a cost issue – why upgrade or change an OS when doing so brings either a monetary cost or a resource cost? Just wait until the hardware fails and buy a new machine, with, most likely, a pre-installed OS, or if not a pre-sequenced network install. Which brings me back to the inertia argument. It's hard to beat pre-installed, market dominant OS. Someone, perhaps Eric, criticized Apple for not selling an x86 OS and bringing Apple to the masses. In my view, Apple is rightly positioning itself as the luxury Lexus, Mercedes, or BMW against MS's Chevrolet, rather than Linux's Nissan or Toyota (think back to the 60's and 70's). Although the car analogy probably only fits about 60% of the OS environment.

I could go on, but you probably get the point and I'm bored of it. - by robT

History and mess(11:28am EST Wed Jan 28 2004)The problem with the linux Desktop is that it doesnt have one !

It has X11Rn – a windowing system.

Then …errr … whatever the packager of the distribution puts ontop.

I've been writing desktop code recently, even some using xlib and i'd forgotton just how badely it sucks !!!!!

X11 is not a suitable platform for a modern GUI, Gnome and KDE are splitting development resources in half – for the sake of everyone cant we just have a winner, then a set of good powerful consistent tools to write code … quickly ….. Business users want Delpi/VB type code, not C/C++. Even Java that was meant to plug the gap hasnt lived up to the hype – its got no consistant poweful cross platform GUI tools.

What makes windows for software development isnt that windows is good, its just got good tools and common look&feel …………

I develop embedded products so I understand the strengths of linux, but I also use it as my desktop so I can see its weakness.

Jon

- by Jonathan Andrews

Author is probably right…(2:24pm EST Wed Jan 28 2004)The author is probably right. Linux needs polish. I'm not sure how many more times an article can state this obvious fact. It's not going to happen over night. It seems the author has an ax to grind with some in the Linux camp, and uses this article to do that.- by kenk

The key is schools(2:26pm EST Wed Jan 28 2004)There's a huge amount of people out there who really don't “get” computers very well but have to use them. The large majority of those people use Windows. The reason why Linux has been so successful so far is that there are lots of people who are inquisitive, and like to experiment. If you want to supplant Windows as the ultimate desktop, you need to target schools. If the computer labs in schools run Linux, then the kids will ask for it at home to do their homework, and as those kids grow older, they will want Linux at work. It's primarily a human nature thing. Call it laziness, call it inertia, people stick with what they know. Remember DOS and Apple? Even with all the advertising and GUI simplicity, the fact was more people were comfortable using DOS because that's what they learned (read memorized) at school and that's what they use at work, so that's what they want at home. Target the schools and the next generation, then you'll see change. I love Linux because of how open, flexible, and capable it is. Linux does require a little more brain power to run, but I respect any system that challenges me to learn more. I have to admit, there is a part of me that wants Linux to stay off the desktops of the average user. I know it sounds bad, but a part of me says to all the masses to hell with you all and your self-imposed ignorance, you deserve Windows and the techno-palbum that it feeds you. I'll stick with meat-and-potatoes Linux thank you very much. - by unclejoe

Re: True… by INTIMIDATOR(4:14am EST Thu Jan 29 2004)“facts there. Linux is not ready for prime time on the desktop…nor will it ever unless a set of standards are used. I found it fascinating that Linux desktop is so close to Apple. “

You're not getting the point here … guess which OS company is NOT working to general standards? Hint: starts with an M and ends with an S *wink wink*. What you seem to be saying is that Linux does not follow MS standards! Btw, don't get me wrong, you're not the only one shouting such phrases about standard / standards. Take cell phones — how come seimens can work as well as nokia as sony/ericsson on any given network out there? Now imaging if one of them were to dominate 98% of the market and lock everyone else out — or make it harder and harder to get in? That's the real issue. And the only way we can make a dent in that 98% is to keep the faith and promote OSS more and more rather than trying to say that we all need to meet “PC” standards. PC standards right now mean MS standards — MSN, WMP9, etc etc etc - by PaintedReality

Designing user interfaces(5:08am EST Thu Jan 29 2004)A complex system doesn't have to be harder to operate. Normally, when I design complex systems, I design a user interface that is easy to operate, either by setting the correct defaults or providing a intuitive interface. Complex systems have layers of complexity. By hiding this complexity in a abstract way, you can make a difficult task easy. However, productivity is usually achieved by harder to use interfaces. E.g. an Explorer-like file browser makes it easy to delete a file. To delete a bunch of files, you can add a “regular expression” interface, or – a layer deeper – a prompt. I think KDE does this quite well. Please note that most Windows machines come PREINSTALLED. No such luck with an average Linux PC. Can it be achieved? Yes. Does my SuSE do it for me? As well as it can. I don't see the problem. - by Choice

Ideology *does* matters(7:10am EST Thu Jan 29 2004)Eric, I think you make some valid points regarding desktop Linux, and also some points I disagree with.

Such things as “10 text editors” and yet perhaps no media player set up for the main file types.

Linux help systems for a windows (i.e. GUI based) user are *inexcusably* bad.

I have also consistently read of the difficulty factor from ISV's. ( though I suspect the MS relationship plays a significant factor for the big Win ISV's as well )

There are still far too many times I install a new distro and just shake my head, wondering “what were they thinking?”

I have to read posts where someone is talking about reducing the default apps to what is *best* in each type of software as an *innovation*, no duh! If you're new you want to start with what is generally considered the best and if you're experienced your gonna' install what *you want* anyway. In what parralel universe does including 100 applications most users won't use but not the 10 ( Mozilla, flash, real, etc) that *everyone* will, make sense?

Now for the other part.

**Disclaimer** I am a Linux Zealot!

At my last company I introduced and pushed for a sea change from an all MS shop to a position where FOSS was the first consideration and Open Standards were essential. This did not reach down to the desktop though, it was confined to the back-end. I was activly working with voluntees who were willing to try Mozilla and OpenOffice and seaching for a VStudio replacement, but it just wasn't there yet.

Personally I prefered giving users a “degree” of choice on their desktops, they are the ones who have to spend all day on them after all, but the flip side was they had to be informed of how their choice affected *others* choices, they had to hear about the “network effect”.

And this is where we part ways. I believed then, as I still do, that ideology not only is acceptable in the decision making process, it is *essential*. I would take the position that there is a definite value and strategic imperative in “openness” whether standards, protocols, APIs, or source code, seperate from the technological value of the code to produce a consistant result. If you reduce your considerations to purely technical grounds you will not get to a full consideration of this value.

Personally, I have always seen my duty in IT, paid or pro bono, as helping folks get the most out of technology. To me that is not just fixing existing systems but informing about where the IT landscape is, and what the choices are, and where specific choices may lead. Like deepening a multiple monopolist to the point where the choices of yesterday are not available anymore. To let people know that IT is not like the tranportation industry, objects in IT have an interdependence more than an independence, and if that interdependence is not based on openness then we are headed, *all of us*, to a place where IT will ultimately cost more than it should and serve someone else's (MS) aims first and ours only secondarily.

And we are far to early in the Tech revolution to let that happen.

Regards,

- by Clifton Hyatt

Does linux need to improve?(8:58am EST Thu Jan 29 2004)Why not ask the same of Windows? Windows has a 90+ percentage in the West. The East does not trust MicroSoft. Use of computers in the East is growing rapidly while the West is saturated. Markets are moving to Asia. The numbers are against MS. - by Frank

About Evolution(6:05am EST Fri Jan 30 2004)Evolution has Connector that has been updated to work with Exchange 2003. You need to pay for it though. Its funny you didn't know that, yet you go on to deride Evolution as being inadequate.

There are many valid reason for which Linux may not be ready, but in most cases, it has equal if not better apps than Windows. A better security model, and better looks too.

Linux is definitely better than Wndows 98 for example, and at some point, someone decided that 98 was fit for human consumption. I have done things in Linux out of the box that I could only dream of in Windows. The problem is that people think people cannot learn. I have learnt. 2 years ago I did not know Linux. Some things are not the fault of Linux anyway. Its a chicken and egg situation. But osme people are now taking steps. - by Maynard